Jack Goldsmith on the NYT and the Leaked Supreme Court "Shadow Papers"
The article centers a legal academic's (Jack Goldsmith's) critique of NYT reporting rather than reporting itself, using the loaded term 'tendentious' to characterize the Times's framing. While Reason's libertarian perspective typically favors skepticism of institutional power (including media), the framing here protects judicial privacy concerns—a position closer to establishment and conservative legal thought.
Primary voices: academic or expert, media outlet
- This article does not address the substantive content or accuracy of the leaked memoranda themselves
- This article does not provide the Times's response or justification for its reporting approach
Framing may shift depending on how courts subsequently rule on the leaked documents' publication and whether additional context emerges about their provenance or significance.
Opinion/analysisBoth-sides framingCharged language
A critique of the New York Times "unfortunately tendentious reporting about the memoranda."
Full article not available — click below to read at the source.
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first.
Sign in to leave a comment.